I have an issue using EF7 in a web application with which I could use some help. I'm currently using EF7 RC1.
Here are some models that illustrate my problem.
Contact
public class Contact
{
public Guid Id { get; set; }
public string Desc { get; set; }
public ContactType ContactType { get; set; }
}
ContactType
public class ContactType
{
public Guid Id { get; set; }
public string Desc { get; set; }
public ICollection<Contact> Contacts { get; set; }
}
These models are related via Fluent API like this:
modelBuilder.Entity<Contact>(entity => {
// abridged for clarity
entity
.HasOne(c => c.ContactType)
.WithMany(ct => ct.Contacts)
.IsRequired();
});
My needs are to be able to retrieve a collection of Contact entities from the database with their ContactType property loaded. EF makes this quite easy:
using(var context = new MyDbContext()) {
var contacts = await context
.Contacts
.Include(c => c.ContactTypes)
.Where(/* some search criteria */)
.ToListAsync();
}
The issue is that in loading the ContactType properties of the Contact entities (which happens due to the call to .Include() in the query), EF also helpfully loads the Contacts property of each ContactType entity, resulting in an infinite chain of Contacts pointing at ContactTypes and ContactTypes pointing at Contacts. I understand why this is the default behavior and that it's helpful in many cases, but my needs are to serialize these entities to JSON and send them down to the client - it's a read-only situation.
My desired behavior is for EF to return a collection of Contacts with loaded (non-null) ContactType properties that have their Contacts property set to null. Is this something EF can do? Is there any way to end up with the object graph I want short of manually nulling out properties I don't want populated?
Things I've tried:
Appending .AsNoTracking() to the EF query (which doesn't seem to stop
the Contacts property of the ContactType entity from being loaded)
Telling Json.NET not to serialize infinite reference loops (which is
required to avoid infinite recursion during serialization, but still
results in a lot of extra data being serialized)
You can't avoid EF to load ContactType.Contacts collection, as it's not actually loading it but filling the collection with the loaded Contact instances.
This is why using AsNoTracking has no efect, because is not a problem of lazy loading nor ChangeTracker.
You have three possible solutions:
Use Json.NET ReferenceLoopHandling = ReferenceLoopHandling.Ignore, but as you stated it will generate lot of unnecesary data, as you will get the collection of Contacts for every ContactType
Use [JsonIgnore] attribute on ContactType.Contacts so it will be ignored by the serializer. But it will ignore it always, I don't know if you need it in other situations
Define a DTO, use something like Automapper to map your data in it (without Contacts collection) and serialize it
I would prefer the 3rd option as I don't like sending domain model objects to the client, and it avoid adding attributes to domain model not related with domain.
I have same question Entity Framework 7 Core disable auto loading
I add AsNoTracking()
IQueryable<ScheduleModel> q = _db.Schedules;
q = q.AsNoTracking();
q = q.Include(x => x.ElementItem);
q = q.Include(x => x.ScheduleHours);
Properties not populate automatic now.
Related
I'm new at code first in entity framework and reading up on relationships, I see everyone does it differently. It might be because of earlier versions, might be the same or might be because of performance.
Let's say I have two tables Company and User.
I would set the company-to-user relationship like this:
public List<User> Users { get; set; } = new List<User>();
Then if I from the user-to-company perspective needed to find the company, I would have this in the User:
public Company Company { get; set; }
And do this query:
return await _clientContext.Users.Where(x => x.Company.Id == companyId).ToListAsync();
Or I could have this:
public int CompanyId { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("CompanyId")]
public Company Company { get; set; }
And have this query:
return await _clientContext.Users.Where(x => x.CompanyId == companyId).ToListAsync();
Also some define Company with the keyword virtual like this:
public virtual Company Company { get; set; }
I'm not sure if every scenario is the same and doing x.CompanyId instead of x.Company.Id would actually be the same. What is used normally?
I generally recommend the first option using Shadow Properties for FKs over the second when using navigation properties. The main reason is that with the second approach there are two sources of truth. For instance with a Team referencing a Coach, some code may use team.CoachId while other code uses team.Coach.CoachId. These two values are not guaranteed to always be in sync. (depending on when you happen to check them when one or the other is updated.)
Updating references between entities via a FK property can have varied behaviour depending on whether the referenced entity is loaded or not.
What is the expected difference between if want to update a team's coach:
var teamA = context.Teams.Single(x => x.TeamId == teamId);
If Team has a Coach navigation property and a CoachId FK reference I could do...
teamA.CoachId = newCoachId;
If TeamA's old coach ID was 1, and the newCoachId = 2, what do you think happens if I have code that lazy loads the coach before SaveChanges?
var coachName = teamA.Coach.Name;
You might expect that since the Coach hadn't been loaded yet it would load in Coach #2's name, but it loads Coach #1 because the change hasn't been committed even though teamA.CoachId == 2. If you check the Coach reference after SaveChanges you get Coach #2.
Depending on whether lazy loading is enabled or not you can get a bit strange behaviour by setting a FK property where navigation properties are nulled. Even when eager loading, changing a FK property will potentially trigger a new lazy load if that new entity isn't already tracked:
var teamA = context.Teams.Include(x => x.Coach).Single(x => x.TeamId == teamId);
teamA.CoachId == newCoachId;
var coachName = teamA.Coach.Name; // Still points to Coach #1's name as expected.
context.SaveChanges();
coachName = teamA.Coach.Name; // Triggers lazy load and return new coach's name.
Saving a FK against an entity that has eager loaded the reference does not automatically re-populate referenced entities. So for instance if you have lazy loading disabled, the same above code:
context.SaveChanges();
coachName = teamA.Coach.Name; // Potential NullReferenceException on teamA.Coach.
This will potentially trigger a null reference exception unless the new coach happens to be tracked by the DbContext prior to SaveChanges being called. If the DbContext is tracking the entity, the new reference will be swapped in on SaveChanges, otherwise it is nulled. (With lazy loading this is covered by the new lazy load call after it was nulled)
When working with navigation properties my default recommendation is to hide FK properties as Shadow Properties. (For EF6 this means using .Map(x => x.MapKey()). For relationships where I only care about the ID, I will expose the FK with no navigation property. So, one or the other. (Such as lookups or bounded contexts where I want raw speed.)
I will deviate sparingly from this for exposing FKs for relationships I may inspect by ID frequently, and treat it as read-only, but still have infrequent need of the navigation property. An example of this would be CreatedBy / CreatedByUserId. Many queries may inspect the CreatedByUserId for data filtering, while some projections may want the CreatedBy.Name etc. A record's CreatedBy doesn't change so I avoid potential pitfalls of the data getting out of sync.
Your second scenario is used normally.
i.e.
public int CompanyId { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("CompanyId")]
public Company Company { get; set; }
And have this query:
return await _clientContext.Users.Where(x => x.CompanyId == companyId).ToListAsync();
Challenge in EF6:
how to check Id of resulting row in the database after running this (esentially adding an entity record):
repository.Add(myEntity1);
...and use that id to add the second entity which has property X = to the id of the first entity?
use that id to add the second entity which has property X = to the id of the first entity?
repository.Add(myEntity2);
Right now there is no linkage between entity 1 and entity 2 because i don;t know how to save the id (automatically generated by ef) after first add
... and preserve it for adding it as a fk in the second entity?
Thanks a lot
You could try this following after your call to SaveChanges:
myEntity2.X = myEntity1.Id;
Then call SaveChanges again. This doesn't really utilise the power of Entity Framework, however, which is in managing relationships between entities. If your class was defined something like this:
public class MyEntity
{
[Key]
public int Id { get; set; }
[ForeignKey(nameof(RelatedEntity))]
public int RelatedEntityId { get; set; }
public MyEntity RelatedEntity { get; set; }
}
You could add your entities something like the following, and the Id/foreign key matching would be handled for you after calling SaveChanges:
myEntity1.RelatedEntity = myEntity2;
This is a fairly general solution, so if you'd like something more specific then you will need to include more details in your question.
You can read more about configuring Entity Framework relationships here.
I have the following in Entity Framework Core:
public class Book {
public Int32 Id { get; set; }
public String Title { get; set; }
public virtual Theme Theme { get; set; }
}
public class Theme {
public Int32 Id { get; set; }
public String Name { get; set; }
public Byte[] Illustration { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Ebook> Ebooks { get; set; }
}
And I have the following linq query:
List<BookModel> books = await context.Books.Select(x =>
new BookModel {
Id = x.Id,
Name = x.Name,
Theme = new ThemeModel {
Id = x.Theme.Id,
Name = x.Theme.Name
}
}).ToListAsync();
I didn't need to include the Theme to make this work, e.g:
List<BookModel> books = await context.Books.Include(x => x.Theme).Select(x => ...
When will I need to use Include in Entity Framework?
UPDATE
I added a column of type Byte[] Illustration in Theme. In my projection I am not including that column so will it be loaded if I use Include? Or is never loaded unless I have it in the projection?
In search for an official answer to your question from Microsoft's side, I found this quote from Diego Vega (part of the Entity Framework and .NET team) made at the aspnet/Announcements github
repository:
A very common issue we see when looking at user LINQ queries is the use of Include() where it is unnecessary and cannot be honored. The typical pattern usually looks something like this:
var pids = context.Orders
.Include(o => o.Product)
.Where(o => o.Product.Name == "Baked Beans")
.Select(o =>o.ProductId)
.ToList();
One might assume that the Include operation here is required because of the reference to the Product navigation property in the Where and Select operations. However, in EF Core, these two things are orthogonal: Include controls which navigation properties are loaded in entities returned in the final results, and our LINQ translator can directly translate expressions involving navigation properties.
You didn't need Include because you were working inside EF context. When you reference Theme inside the anonymous object you are creating, that's not using lazy loading, that's telling EF to do a join.
If you return a list of books and you don't include the themes, then when you try to get the theme you'll notice that it's null. If the EF connection is open and you have lazy loading, it will go to the DB and grab it for you. But, if the connection is not opened, then you have to get it explicitely.
On the other hand, if you use Include, you get the data right away. Under the hood it's gonna do a JOIN to the necessary table and get the data right there.
You can check the SQL query that EF is generating for you and that's gonna make things clearer for you. You'll see only one SQL query.
If you Include a child, it is loaded as part of the original query, which makes it larger.
If you don't Include or reference the child in some other way in the query, the initial resultset is smaller, but each child you later reference will lazy load through a new request to the database.
If you loop through 1000 users in one request and then ask for their 10 photos each, you will make 1001 database requests if you don't Include the child...
Also, lazy loading requires the context hasn't been disposed. Always an unpleasant surprise when you pass an Entity to a view for UI rendering for example.
update
Try this for example and see it fail:
var book = await context.Books.First();
var theme = book.Theme;
Then try this:
var book = await context.Books.Include(b => b.Theme).First();
var theme = book.Theme;
I am working on an N-tier application consisting of a UI layer (MVC), a Business Layer, a Domain layer (for the models) and a DAL for repositories and the EF DbContext.
I'm a bit confused about the inner workings of Entity Framework when updating the properties of an existing object and I'm looking for a good way to validate an object before updating its values in the database.
I have the following model:
public class BlogPost
{
public int BlogPostId { get; set; }
[Required]
public String Title { get; set; }
[Required]
public String Description { get; set; }
[Required]
public DateTime DateTime { get; set; }
public byte[] Image { get; set; }
}
I have the following methods in my manager in BL:
public BlogPost AddBlogPost(string title, string description, byte[] image = null)
{
BlogPost blogPost = new BlogPost()
{
Title = title,
Description = description,
DateTime = DateTime.Now
};
Validate(blogPost);
moduleRepository.CreateBlogPost(blogPost);
return blogPost;
}
public BlogPost ChangeBlogPost(BlogPost blogPost)
{
moduleRepository.UpdateBlogPost(blogPost);
return blogPost;
}
And I have the following methods in my DAL:
public BlogPost CreateBlogPost(BlogPost b)
{
b = context.BlogPosts.Add(b);
context.SaveChanges();
return b;
}
public BlogPost UpdateBlogPost(BlogPost b)
{
context.Entry(b).State = EntityState.Modified;
context.SaveChanges();
return b;
}
My question now is: what's a good way to check that the model is valid before actually trying to change its values in the database?
I was thinking something like this:
public BlogPost ChangeBlogPost(BlogPost blogPost)
{
// STEP 1: put the updated data in a new object
BlogPost updatedBlogPost = new BlogPost()
{
Title = blogPost.Title,
Description = blogPost.Description,
Image = blogPost.Image,
DateTime = blogPost.DateTime
};
// STEP 2: check if the model is valid
this.Validate(updatedBlogPost);
// STEP 3: read the existing blog post with that ID and change the properties
BlogPost b = moduleRepository.ReadBlogPost(blogPost.BlogPostId);
b.Title = blogPost.Title;
b.Description = blogPost.Description;
b.Image = blogPost.Image;
b.DateTime = blogPost.DateTime;
moduleRepository.UpdateBlogPost(blogPost);
return blogPost;
}
EDIT: I figured it's maybe better to just accept primitive types as parameter in the above method instead of the object.
I have a feeling that's too much work for a simple update, but I couldn't find anything else on the internet.
It's probably also worth noting that I'm using a singleton for the DbContext so I have to make sure Entity Framework doesn't change the values in the database before checking that those values are valid (since another call to the context by another class can cause SaveChanges()).
I know singleton on a DbContext is bad practice, but I saw no other option to avoid countless exceptions when working with multiple repositories and entities being tracked by multiple context instances.
PS: I also read about change tracking in Entity Framework but I'm not 100% sure how this will affect what I'm trying to do.
All suggestions and explanations are welcome.
Thanks in advance.
You would check ModelState.IsValid. There are a lot of validation mechanisms built into MVC that you can take advantage of. Built in attributes such as [Required] that you reference above, custom validators, making your business class implement IValidatableObject, overriding EF SaveChanges() to name a few. This article is a good start: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/data/gg193959.aspx
Ok so I kinda answered my own question while doing some research and testing with some dummy data. I thought that when a property changed in MVC as a result of an Edit view, EF also tracked it and changed it in the database.
I figured out that's not how model binding works and realized after some fooling around that model binding actually creates a new object (instead of editing the properties of a dynamic proxy).
I guess I can now just validate the model and then just update the one with the same primary key in the database.
I'm using ASP.NET WebAPI and ran into a problem with a nested model that should be communicated via a WebAPI Controller:
The entities "bond, stock etc." each have a list of entities "price". Server-side, I use the following class to match this requirement..
public class Bond : BaseAsset
{
public int ID { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public virtual List<Price> Prices { get; set; }
}
This leads to the table "Price" having a column for bond, stock etc. and, in case a price is attached to a bond, an entry in its column for bond foreign key.
The error I initially got was
There is already an open DataReader associated with this Command
I fixed that by altering the Connection String to allow MultipleActiveResultSets.
However, I feel there must be better options or at least alternatives when handling nested models. Is it, e.g., a sign for bad model design when one runs into such a problem? Would eager loading change anything?
One alternative to mars is to disable lazy loading
In your DbContext
Configuration.LazyLoadingEnabled = false;
plus when you are loading your data you can explicit load your child tables
context.Bonds.Include(b => b.Prices)